workflows-plan
Skill64 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Transform spec (with frontmatter claims) into an implementation plan with task decomposition and sub-agent assignment. Stage 3 of the development workflow.
In this repository102 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- assumptionsSkill
- capture-learningSkill
- Codex-opus-4-6-promptingSkill
- Codex-promptSkill
- mcp-code-modeSkill
- deploy-team-hubSkill
- diagramSkill
- distillSkill
- effect-tsSkill
- escalateSkill
- evalSkill
- experimentSkill
- hddSkill
- hub-auditSkill
- hub-collabSkill
- implementSkill
- knowledgeSkill
- peer-notebook-delivery-guardSkill
- research-taskSkill
- session-reviewSkill
- source-command-hdd-decideSkill
- source-command-hdd-hddSkill
- source-command-hdd-researchSkill
- source-command-hdd-stage-adrSkill
- source-command-hdd-validateSkill
- statusSkill
- supabaseSkill
- synthesizeSkill
- tasteSkill
- teamSkill
- test-suiteSkill
- theseus-protocolSkill
- thoughtbox:debugSkill
- thoughtbox:decisionSkill
- thoughtbox:evolutionSkill
- thoughtbox:knowledge-querySkill
- thoughtbox:onboardSkill
- thoughtbox:refactorSkill
- thoughtbox:researchSkill
- thoughtbox:session-reviewSkill
- thoughtbox-teamSkill
- ulc-loopSkill
- ulysses-protocolSkill
- workflow-brainstormingSkill
- workflow-ideationSkill
- workflow-reflectionSkill
- workflow-revisionSkill
- workflows-compoundSkill
- workflowSkill
- workflows-reviewSkill
- workflows-workSkill
- workflow-tournamentSkill
- assumptionsSkill
- capture-learningSkill
- claude-opus-4-6-promptingSkill
- claude-promptSkill
- mcp-code-modeSkill
- deploy-team-hubSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. About 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈11
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 8
Create an implementation plan for: $ARGUMENTS
- Distinctive: line 21
If pre-conditions are not met, report what's missing and halt.
- Distinctive: line 27
Read the spec (frontmatter + body) from Stage 2, then investigate the codebase:
- Distinctive: line 31
Map the affected code: Use Glob/Grep to find files that will need changes
- Distinctive: line 32
Check for prior learnings: Search agent memory and compound learnings for relevant patterns
- Very specific: line 67
Write the plan to .workflow/plan.md:
- Distinctive: line 118
Wait for user approval before proceeding.
- Distinctive: line 145
Do NOT start implementing during planning — that's Stage 4's job
- Distinctive: line 146
Do NOT create tasks smaller than one meaningful commit
- Distinctive: line 147
Do NOT create tasks larger than one sub-agent can handle in a single session
- Distinctive: line 148
Do NOT skip codebase investigation — plans based on assumptions fail
- Distinctive: line 149
Do NOT ignore the ADR's hypotheses — the plan must be designed to test them
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Create an implementation plan for: $ARGUMENTS
Purpose
You are executing Stage 3 (Planning) of the development workflow. The spec with frontmatter claims exists from Stage 2. Your job is to decompose the work into sub-agent-sized tasks, identify dependencies, and produce a plan file that Stage 4 can execute.
Pre-Conditions
Before starting, verify:
.workflow/state.jsonexists andcurrentStageis"planning"- A spec exists (check
stages.dev-docs.artifacts.specin state) - Spec frontmatter includes at least one claim (check
stages.dev-docs.artifacts.specin state)
If pre-conditions are not met, report what's missing and halt.
Process
Step 1: Gather Context
Read the spec (frontmatter + body) from Stage 2, then investigate the codebase:
- Read the spec: Understand what needs to be built
- Read spec claims: Understand falsifiable claims and required evidence
- Map the affected code: Use Glob/Grep to find files that will need changes
- Check for prior learnings: Search agent memory and compound learnings for relevant patterns
- Check existing tests: Identify test files that will need updates
Step 2: Decompose into Tasks
Break the implementation into discrete, sub-agent-sized units of work. Each task must be:
- Atomic: One task = one logical change = one commit
- Testable: Each task has clear acceptance criteria
- Ordered: Dependencies between tasks are explicit
For each task, define:
### Task N: <title>
**Files**: [list of files to create/modify]
**Depends on**: [task numbers, or "none"]
**Acceptance criteria**:
- [ ] [specific, verifiable condition]
- [ ] [specific, verifiable condition]
**Notes**: [implementation hints, gotchas from codebase investigation]Step 3: Identify Risks
For each task, flag:
- Files with high churn or complexity
- Areas where the spec's assumptions may not hold
- External dependencies or integration points
- Tests that may need significant rework
Step 4: Write the Plan File
Write the plan to .workflow/plan.md:
# Implementation Plan: <title>
**Workflow**: <id>
**Spec**: <spec path>
**ADR**: <adr path>
**Branch**: <branch>
**Created**: <ISO timestamp>
## Overview
[1-2 paragraph summary of what's being built and the approach]
## Task Breakdown
[Task definitions from Step 2]
## Dependency Graph
[Simple text diagram showing task ordering]
## Risks
[From Step 3]
## Estimated Scope
- Tasks: N
- Files affected: N
- New files: N
- Tests to write: NStep 5: Get User Approval
Present the plan summary and ask the user to approve:
PLAN READY FOR REVIEW
======================
<title>
Tasks: N | Files: N | Risks: N flagged
[task list with 1-line summaries]
Approve this plan? (The conductor will dispatch /workflows-work to execute it)Wait for user approval before proceeding.
Step 6: Record and Handoff
After user approves:
- Update workflow state (
.workflow/state.json):- Set
stages.planning.statusto"completed" - Set
stages.planning.completedAtto current ISO timestamp - Set
stages.planning.artifacts.planto.workflow/plan.md - Set
currentStageto"implementation" - Update
updatedAt
- Set
- Present the handoff:
PLANNING COMPLETE ================== Plan: .workflow/plan.md Tasks: N Dependencies: [summary] Next: Stage 4 - Implementation (/workflows-work)
Anti-Patterns
- Do NOT start implementing during planning — that's Stage 4's job
- Do NOT create tasks smaller than one meaningful commit
- Do NOT create tasks larger than one sub-agent can handle in a single session
- Do NOT skip codebase investigation — plans based on assumptions fail
- Do NOT ignore the ADR's hypotheses — the plan must be designed to test them
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

